The U.S. Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision in King v. Burwell does more than resolve a question of statutory construction about whether Congress intended for federal tax subsidies to be available to reduce consumer spending on health insurance coverage purchased through federally run exchanges. The Supreme Court’s decision in favor of the Obama administration seems to have, once again, preserved the core underpinnings of the Affordable Care Act.

Three years ago, we were anxiously awaiting the announcement of the Supreme Court’s decision in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius. This case challenged the constitutionality of the ACA's requirement that all Americans maintain minimum essential health coverage or pay a tax penalty. This provision, still commonly referred to as the “individual mandate,” is a key prong of the shared responsibility policy underlying the ACA and, although some argue a tepid mandate in its final form, remains a prerequisite for health insurers conceding to offer guaranteed issue, ACA-compliant coverage to individuals and small groups.

Originally published in Law360 on June 25, 2015.